Re: Resumptive pronoun?

well i solved this problem this way:

1. a demonstrative pronoun for one single noun, which is direct/obvious/preceeding.
2. a demonstrative pronoun for a whole phrase, which is
connected/complexity/relation/whole structure/whole concept

with "this/that" we dont distinct both.
lets say we define the words:
"le" for point 1. and
"lo" for point 2.

example sentences:
"the car, which is red" would convert to "the car, LE is red"
LE refers just to the car.
"i wake up in the morning when the sun rises. this makes me hungry. "
would convert to " i wake up in the morning when the sun rises. LO makes me hungry.
LO refers to the whole sentence, to the whole phrase.
LO is not just referring to any single word like "the sun", or "the wakening", or "the morning"
no ! the whole phrase is it which is meant.

however i see no real need for an explicit resumptive pronoun beside a demonstrative pronoun.
both express the same concept.


DT> Okay, just a question.

DT> If I have a sentence, literally "The shirt, the one that you wear, it is
DT> green", or "The island, the place at which there is a tree, is over there",
DT> are "the one that" and "the place that" resumptive pronouns or not?

DT> Imperative


"rurmlor entflöt, fluppseveri trimel akre wopel larf."
- alte redensart

Reply